PURUSHOTHAM GOKULDAS, Vs. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE are sixteen appeals filed by the appellants with reference to the common impugned order involving common issues and therefore they are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) ARGUING for the appellant Shri Parameshwaran submitted that the issue relates to clubbing of clearances. He submits that there is no justification for clubbing of clearances effected by the respective units. All nine units are separate legal entities having got separate registration of sales tax and central excise and other relevant licenses. He submitted that demand has been raised from nine units on the ground that they are managed by family members. He contended that since they are separate legal entities in eye of law there was no question of clubbing of clearances. He argued that there was neither mutuality of interest nor money flow back among the respective units to enable the Department for clubbing of clearances.

(3.) ON the other hand Smt. Radha Arun submitted that entire show was managed by one group and since that group manufactured the excisable goods in the name of different units, department was justified in clubbing clearances of the respective units and to raise the demand. She submitted that clubbing of clearances is permissible in such circumstances as envisaged under Notification No. 175/86. She read the relevant portion in the Notification which is as under: